With many computers, replacing any internal components would definitely circumvent DRM.
Those little bits of paper tape connecting the side panel with the frame, the ones that state Warranty Void if Removed, are probably sufficient under law to qualify as DRM as they are clearly intended to discourage users altering the internal design of the computer system.

Given the way ISPs and telcos in the US make haste to deliver personal information to government "requests", I'd say that promoting the concept of positive identification to access websites is anything but unintended.

The real cost item would be in ensuring that once the app had been removed, the address book information was also removed from Path's possession.
Hiring the people necessary to sift through their electronic and paper storage systems as well as ensuring that no off-site backups contained the information would cost far more than $12,250.

If this case had gone in Scott's favour, wouldn't that mean that retailers could be sued for selling the CD in the first place? After all, they bought it (albeit at wholesale price) and then attempted to resell it.

If this were to be accepted into law, wouldn't that mean that any physical item found to be associated with a copyright could not be sold? Wouldn't the same restriction apply to any physical item associated with a patent?

In one example, Olympia Pizza, which has been in business here for a very long time, was threatened with a shutdown if they didn't change their name (fortunately, a public outcry prevented that from happening).

The same scenario is played out everywhere, I suspect; we're just not allowed to hear about it outside of any city currently afflicted with a case of Olympics.

This means I'll be forced to read copied-and-pasted Canadian Press releases on one of the other several hundred news sites which "report" the same, word-for-word, story, but not with that nice G&M font!!